Tuesday, April 26, 2005

Today at OpinionJournal.com, Dr. Sowell has the featured article entitled, "Crippled by Their Culture". He writes that "race doesn't hold back America's black rednecks. Nor does racism." While this is certainly a thought provoking essay which I would in no way disparage, I disagree with the term "redneck" as Dr. Sowell has used it. Although today the word has the meaning that was originally used by Yankee soldiers to describe all rural Southerners, the immigrant "Rednecks" who first came to America were the Scots-Irish who settled in the Appalachians and who did not espouse slavery, nor had much contact with Southern blacks. In addition, they were usually educated and literate. The immigrant white indentured servants, convicts and other miscreants of the Tidewater area of the South, were in fact those whites who had the most contact and influence on the African immigrants. Early court records document the many instances of white women being punished for giving birth to mulatto children. It seems that these are the people of whom Dr. Sowell is speaking, and they were never considered "rednecks" at the time of their arrival on America's shores.

For most of the history of this country, differences between the black and the white population--whether in income, IQ, crime rates, or whatever--have been attributed to either race or racism. For much of the first half of the 20th century, these differences were attributed to race--that is, to an assumption that blacks just did not have it in their genes to do as well as white people. The tide began to turn in the second half of the 20th century, when the assumption developed that black-white differences were due to racism on the part of whites.

Three decades of my own research lead me to believe that neither of those explanations will stand up under scrutiny of the facts. As one small example, a study published last year indicated that most of the black alumni of Harvard were from either the West Indies or Africa, or were the children of West Indian or African immigrants. These people are the same race as American blacks, who greatly outnumber either or both.

If this disparity is not due to race, it is equally hard to explain by racism. To a racist, one black is pretty much the same as another. But, even if a racist somehow let his racism stop at the water's edge, how could he tell which student was the son or daughter of someone born in the West Indies or in Africa, especially since their American-born offspring probably do not even have a foreign accent?

of Pelosia and Delay -- According to MSNBC and the Washington Post there has been a rush to refile travel records by lawmakers in Congress. Nancy Pelosi, the Democrat's leader actually apologized for her illegalities, claiming she was unaware of the rules. The Republican whip, Tom Delay, has said the same thing, but in his case it does not matter. There are two sets of ethics rules, depending on which party you belong to.

"I apologize" -- In another case, an aide to House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) had not reported a 2004 trip to South Korea until a Washington Post reporter asked her office about it. Eddie Charmaine Manansala, Pelosi's special assistant on East Asian affairs, filed a disclosure form for the $9,087 trip a few hours after the newspaper's inquiry and sent a note to the ethics committee saying, "I did not know I was supposed to file these forms and I apologize for its lateness."

Rep. Neil Abercrombie (D-Hawaii) even asked the ethics committee to investigate him after a reporter for the newspaper Roll Call pointed out that a travel disclosure form from 2001 listed the lobbying firm Rooney Group International as paying for a $1,782 trip to Boston, which would be a violation of House rules.

Abercrombie's aides said they have since determined that the lobbying firm's expenses were reimbursed by the nonprofit group that Abercrombie addressed on the trip, the Ancient and Honorable Artillery Company of Massachusetts. House rules state that the prohibition against lobbyists paying for members' travel applies "even where the lobbyist . . . will later be reimbursed for those expenses by a non-lobbyist client."

This is cool! Fellow Texans riding on Air Force One at taxpayer expense. What will they say now? Blogs for Bush is reporting , "Bush To Give DeLay Ride on Air Force One: The AP reports that President Bush, in a show of support for Tom DeLay, will give him a ride from Texas to Washington tomorrow."

"Even if I see Runar while he has major police protection I will shoot him to death," a radical Islamist told Swedish newspaper Expressen. Persons connected to the Kurdish group Ansar al-Islam claim to have received a fatwa, a decree from a Muslim religious leader, to kill Sögaard.

Sögaard said he fears for his life and understands that he has angered the wrong people.

Monday, April 25, 2005

Professor Jasper Rine who lectures at UC Berkeley had his laptop stolen by a thief who was after exam data. Unfortunately, Professor Rine had other much more important data on his laptop. If you ever have occasion during your lifetime to want to frighten the beejeebies out of someone, you may want to save this transcript of the Rine speech which Blast Radius has entitled "A World of Pain".

To listen to an MP3 of Professor Rine's spine chilling discourse, here it is via Sean Graham who says: "I made a very lo-fi mp3 of the audio from the 'Stolen Laptop Lecture'.

The spinmeisters of the Deomocrat party have been trying to convince "We the People" that the right to filibuster is guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution. It is not. You may verify that it is not by reading the historic document for yourself. It is amazingly simple and straight forward. Click on the link, U.S. Constitution, and go up to 'Edit' on your tool bar and using the pull down menu, click on 'Find' and type in 'Filibuster', and see if it is there. It isn't.

Pat Cleary says "That's because it's a Senate rule, part of the arcana that makes up the ways of the US Senate. And, they've changed the rule throughout history. They may be fixin' to change it again."

We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

SPRINGFIELD, Ill., April 19 - The world may little note nor long remember what George W. Bush said on Tuesday at the dedication of the Abraham Lincoln Presidential Library and Museum. But it is not every day that the 43rd president of the United States encounters the ghostly, lifelike renditions of the 16th, managing a war from the bedrooms that the Bush family now occupies.

"In a small way, I can relate to the rail-splitter from out West because he had a way of speaking that was not always appreciated by the newspapers back East," Mr. Bush said to laughter before a crowd of thousands who jammed into the downtown of the Illinois capital. "A New York Times story on his first inaugural address reported that Mr. Lincoln was lucky 'it was not the constitution of the English language and the laws of English grammar that he was called upon to support.' "

With a pause, Mr. Bush added, "I think that fellow is still writing for The Times."

DAVID ROSSIE in the Binghamton Press & Sun-Bulletin made a most interesting commentary comparing different phrases from the various speeches of the two wartime presidents. Rossie's piece is entitled Presidential rhetoric, then and now. Here I have included the examples of "Bush-Speak". If you want to see the comparison between the two presidents, Lincoln and Bush, go to the Rossie Link.

During a visit last week to the Lincoln Library and Museum in Springfield, Ill., our current president drew a comparison between his speaking style and that of Mr. Lincoln, one that should be obvious to the impartial observer, but one that has, nonetheless, been ignored by the jackals of the liberal media. Herewith, in their own words, proof of that linguistic bond:

"I had the opportunity to go out to Goree Island and talk about what slavery meant to America. It's very interesting when you think about it. The slaves who left here to go to America, because of their steadfast and their religion and their belief in freedom, helped change America." G.W. Bush. July 8, 2003.

"I don't like the idea of having an undocumented economy in the greatest country in the face of the earth." G.W. Bush. Jan 9, 2004.

"One of the great things about this country is a lot of people pray." G.W. Bush, April 13, 2003.

"People can read everything they want into it when they hear 'faith-based initiative.' That all of a sudden opens everybody's imagination in the world to vast possibilities, some of which exist and some which don't." G. W. Bush, speaking in Washington, July 16, 2003.

"The federal government and the state government must not fear programs who change lives, but must welcome those faith-based programs for the embetterment of mankind." G. W. Bush, Stockton, Calif., Aug. 23, 2002.

"I wanna remind you all that I -- in order -- what in order to fight and win the war it requires a expenditure of money that is commiserate with keeping a promise to our troops to make sure that they're well-paid, well-trained, well-equipped." G.W. Bush, Dec. 15, 2003.

"The true strength of America is the fact that we've got millions of fellow citizens who are willing to love a neighbor just like they would like to be loved themselves." G.W. Bush, June 19, 2003.

I would say that our president is in good company if he is being compared to Abraham Lincoln. However, that is definitely not the reaction over at the Smirky Wimp where Rossie's article was posted under Commander-In-Thief.

Demonizing political leaders as Nazis seems to be the latest weapon the loony left has taken from its arsenal. President Bush and Attorney General Ashcroft have seemed to be the favored targets, yet amazingly, the new Pope Benedict is now the recipient. I have not found an example from a reputable segment of the media, such as newspapers, television shows, etcetera, which have actually written "The Pope is a Nazi", but instead the word "Nazi" is typically found in a headline and upon further reading, one learns only of Joseph Ratzinger's encounters with the movement during his youth in Germany. Whatever group is the instigator of this slime job, whether leftists, liberals, Democrats, Jews, Israelis or just plain Christophobes, it is a grave error in judgment. Each day there are fewer and fewer survivors from the terrible times when the real Nazis terrorized the western world. Fewer and fewer people will be alive to testify to the real horror of the Third Reich. To the young people of today, World War II is ancient history; almost as far back as the Civil War was, when I was growing up. Describing such a saintly man as Pope Benedict XVI as a Nazi, teaches a false history lesson to those youngsters. How bad could the Nazis have really been, when we all know that Pope Benedict has not harmed a living soul in his entire life? If Leftists teach that Nazis were as evil as George Bush, just how evil will the next generation believe that the Nazis really were?

For the record, Joseph Ratzinger , as far as I have discovered, is linked to the Nazi Party only by being a German subject in Germany at the time of the Third Reich, being required, under threat, to join a Hitler Youth Group, and being conscripted, twice I believe, into the German army. He was part of the very young men who were used essentially as canon fodder. The young Ratzinger deserted the Army and returned to his home village, knowing that the penalty for his crime was death. Fortunately, he was captured by the Americans, and when the war was over, he returned to the seminary. That is the extent of the Pope's connection to Nazism, and for that he is being unjustly labeled as a Nazi.

I have not been to Daily Kos in a while, but I went earlier this afternoon and it seems like every other diary on the site refers to Pope Benedict XVI as a Nazi. In fact, there is this diary that actually demands that liberals call him the Nazi Pope. If you think I am cherry picking off of Daily Kos, you can find other Pope Benedict XVI=Nazi diaries here, here, and here. And that does not even include the numerous references to Pope Benedict XVI as the Nazi pope in comments of other diaries.

There's heated debate about whether it's appropriate to call Ratzinger the Nazi Pope. It is not clear he's still influenced by the Nazi teaching during his childhood, however, it is clear he was in the Nazi Youth Camp and he is notoriously ultraconversative.

I'm pretty tired of hearing people say we should not question his past, and he was just a child etc. Yes, he was a child, but we're talking about the spiritual leader of Catholics. What is wrong to hold him to high standard? Why can't they choose another cardinal with better image? If he didn't have the courage to resist joining Nazi Youth Camp, probably we should not expect him to be the leader as well.

I will call him Nazi Pope, plain and simple, for his past, more importantly, for his current facist doctrine."

Here is reporting of another abuse by a state sanctioned broadcasting company trying to cover legitimate news. Throughout the English speaking world the media sponsored by the federal governments are unanimously liberal and socialist leaning; so much so that even when conservative governments are elected, those entrenched forces are too powerful to change. From the BBC, the most infamous of all for its bias, to PBS in the United States and CBN in Canada, they all march in lock step with the liberal mantra, which in 2005, is principally anti-war, anti-Bush, anti-American. Contrary to their claims, their reporting is slanted to favor the left and to disparage the right. "We The People", should ask ourselves why is it that a free society must receive its news from a government mouthpiece, such as the BBC, PBS or CBN? The Tories are furious as the BEEB sends hecklers to bait Michael Howard.

"By Patrick Hennessy, Political Editor, (Filed: 24/04/2005)The BBC was last night plunged into a damaging general election row after it admitted equipping three hecklers with microphones and sending them into a campaign meeting addressed by Michael Howard, the Conservative leader.

The Tories have made an official protest after the hecklers, who were given the microphones by producers, were caught at a party event in the North West last week. Guy Black, the party's head of communications, wrote in a letter to Helen Boaden, the BBC's director of news, that the hecklers began shouting slogans that were 'distracting and clearly hostile to the Conservative Party'."

John Gibson of Fox News has stood up to the BBC outrages against the current U.S. administration, and as a result the liberal British government has entered the fray and actually censured him, to which he responded that he was --

Proud to Be Censured by the British Government. I've got a bunch of Brits mad at me because I dared to defend myself for saying that a BBC reporter lied, that his bosses defended the lie and that the network displays a "frothing-at-the-mouth anti-Americanism." Because I dared to say it, I have been "censured by an agency of the British government."My attitude has been... do you get a medal with that? If there were an official "I've been censured" medal, I'd wear it on the air right next to my flag pin. Honest... if the palace has one of those, send it on over and I'll wear it.

Saturday, April 23, 2005

That is correct. Do not try this stunt in the United States of America - not yet anyway. Not until a few more Euro-socialist leaning Supremes are confirmed, such as Anthony Kennedy.

Aftenposten Norway, Norwegian news in English:Final Porn Decision"Norway's Supreme Court supported decisions refusing Conoco Phillips the right to fire two workers who surfed the Internet for pornographic images on company time. The two workers on the Ekofisk field lost their jobs after being caught peeping at porn on the job in the summer of 2002. The pair took their case to court and won at both the municipal and appeals level, NRK (Norwegian Broadcasting) reports. Conoco Phillips appealed the decisions to the Supreme Court in order to have a clarification of what employees can do on company time and what employers can do to enforce violations of company policy. The Supreme Court has ruled that the firings were not justified and have awarded the two NOK 250,000 (USD 40,000) each in compensation."

Dr. Dean did an imitation of cocaine snorting, in "supposed" ridicule of conservative talk show host, Rush Limbaugh. Yes it is true, the Democrat's leading spokesman, coming on the heels of his "I Have a Scream" and "I Hate Republicans" speeches, according to "The Minneapolis Star-Tribune" (via Powerline), once more brought joyous laughter to his followers, by equating Limbaugh's addiction to medically prescribed painkillers with cocaine:

[Howard] "Dean regaled an appreciative [ACLU] audience for nearly 90 minutes without once raising his voice, as he did after last year's Iowa primary election. But he did draw howls of laughter by mimicking a drug-snorting Rush Limbaugh. 'I'm not very dignified,' he said. 'But I'm not running for president anymore.'"

What kind of an American would want to be associated with this Democrat Party? I will tell you; only crude, hateful, bigoted, tasteless and low-class Americans. Only Liberals, such as the ACLU audience, could find Dean's performance to be so hilarious and deserving of applause. This was no slip of the tongue; the "good" doctor's horrible manners and hurtful words were intentional. He said the line once then stopped himself and said it again while making the sound of a person snorting coke. What kind of medical doctor would ridicule a recovering addict and confuse addiction to pain pills with cocaine snorting? I suppose the answer to that question is the same kind of physician who would belong to a political party that cheers for Dr. Kevorkian and the euthanasia crowd, that honors medical people who brutally dismember living, almost born babies.

When will we be entertained by Dr. Demented with Animal House imitations of the Democrat Party's loyal Hollywood friends who have been in and out of drug rehab for years and years? When will they do a rollicking performance of the suffering of HIV and Aids victims? Where are the virtues of love, toleration and compassion, to which the Democrats claim to own the patent rights? What's next? Will he be accusing the Republican Party of patent infringement violations for stealing virtues?

Jackson's Junction has an audio clip (WMV HERE) of Chairman Dean's latest "not very dignified" performance as one of the Belushi Brothers. Hear commentator Dick Morris ponder ,"What has happened to the Democratic Party that this is what its national chairman has been reduced to doing?"

As for the ACLU, I asked a few posts ago - "where are they?" Then I found them, "smoking weed on the border" while trying to entrap the Minutemen. Well .... is it not telling, that while the "ostrich head" of the Democrat party, Screamin' Deanie, was making his performance to the ACLU in Minneapolis, that same infamous ACLU has joined Rush Limbaugh in a law suit in Florida to keep his medical records private? Go figure ... .

BAGHDAD — A Bulgarian crew member of a helicopter that crashed, killing eleven on board, was the only survivor. The Islamic Army in Iraq claimed responsibility for shooting down the Mi-8 chopper. Video was shown on Aljazera Television of the pilot lying on the ground asking for help from the insurgents. One of the insurgents yells at the victim in accented English, "Stand up! Stand up!" Holding up his injured hands the man pleads, "I can't, it's broken". The militants then pull the man up and ask him in Arabic if he has any weapons. He is then told to go, to step back, and the injured man is seen on the video walking away. However, God's will had to be enforced. The insurgents call to him to get his attention and as he turns around, one of the soldiers commands "Carry out God's verdict!" Then the soldiers shout "Allahu akbar!" and riddle his body with bullets. Allah is the greatest! But what kind of God is he?

I have not seen the video, as I am not able to watch such brutality as is committed by these murderous barbarians. However, Jihad Watch described the event. Dr. Sanity has written about this horror and she did watch the video. I agree totally with her words. This world is not a big enough place for them and us.Islamists

Friday, April 22, 2005

Doctor Dean, aka National Chairman of the Dems, is wanting to reshape the abortion issue. What they have always thought was a big winner for them, abortion, they are now realizing is a loser for the Democrats. If only they change the semantics, the playing field, so to speak, it can once again be the big winner for them. According to the following quotes about Howard Dean from "TwinCities.com/Pioneer Press", which I obtained from The Q and O Blog, this is what Dean believes:

"'I think we need to talk differently about abortion,' the blunt-spoken physician and former Vermont governor told several hundred supporters of the Minnesota affiliate of the American Civil Liberties Union at the Minneapolis Convention Center. 'The debate shouldn't be about whether abortion is good or bad, Dean said. It should be about whether a woman has a right to make up her own mind. We got pushed into a corner by the Republican propaganda machine, forced to debate and defend positions that aren't our positions,' he said. 'I don't know anybody in America who's pro-abortion.'"

Dr. Dean knows nobody in America who is pro-abortion? Democrats - what kind of ostrich head have you as your leader? Tell the good doctor who IS pro-abortion. Tell him that your coined phrase "pro-choice" has absolutely nothing to do with the real meaning of "choice", other than it was your choice to use that word as an euphemism for abortion. In addition, so you would not have to speak the unspeakable, "abortion", when describing the anti-abortion side of the issue, you coined another label for them - "anti-choice". As it happened, that phrase just never stuck and in fact it worked against the "pro-abortionistas". People realized what a scam they were witnessing when you labeled the pro-lifers, as anti-choice. The pro-lifers, as a matter of record, believe in far more choices than do those who managed to find the right of abortion in the U.S. Constitution.

Does Dr. Dean know no feminists, no members of N.O.W.? To them abortion has become a ritual or rite of womanhood, much as is baptism for Christians. Does Dr. Dean know none of the fast living young men of today's society, who want none of the burdens of marriage -- not yet, but are too hedonistic to refrain from enjoying the pleasures thereof. As a medical man, does he not know there is an entire industry built upon the cult of abortion?

'If I could strike the words 'choice' and 'abortion' out of the lexicon of our party, I would,' he said. 'The debate and the difference between the parties is we believe a woman has a right to make up her own mind about her health care, and they (Republicans) believe that (House Majority Leader) Tom DeLay and the boys in Congress should be making up that woman's mind.'"

The Democrats, as their leader says, want to "strike the words 'choice' and 'abortion' out of the lexicon of our party". Note that they say nothing of striking the horrible acts against nature that is the actual meaning of the words. No, they only strive to eliminate the dreadful words. When we began the abortions wars there was but one word to describe the killing of an unborn baby - abortion - which no one wanted to say or hear. The bright liberals invented a euphemism, choice. Now the liberals need to come up with another pleasant sounding word to replace the now sullied word "choice". Ever hear of the word "life", Dr. Dean? Everyone loves life.

The so-called right to abortion has pitted mothers against their children and women against men. It has portrayed the greatest of gifts -- a child -- as a competitor, an intrusion, and an inconvenience. --Mother Theresa

THIS IS VERY IMPORTANT! PASS THIS ALONG TO EVERY WOMAN YOU KNOW! the e-mail begins, followed by a touching story about a woman with ovarian cancer. The writer explains that she is trying to save other women from her same fate - if only she had known earlier about the CA125 blood test to detect ovarian cancer. She tells readers to demand that their gynecologist give them a CA125 blood test as part of their yearly exams and "Don't take 'No' for an answer!"

This and many similar stories are circulating among e-mail users and stirring up misconceptions about the CA125 blood test. While this woman's story, if true, is touching, her information regarding CA125 is incorrect.

"Unfortunately, the CA125 blood test is not the ultimate way to detect ovarian cancer," said Dr. Diane Bodurka, assistant professor in M. D. Anderson's Department of Gynecologic Oncology. "We do not have a fool-proof way to detect ovarian cancer in its early stages. That is something we are working towards."

Kathy's story is an urban hoax. It has been on the Internet since 1998. According to Snopes.com, this statement is false: "The CA-125 blood test is a reliable way to detect ovarian cancer in its early stages, and women should insist upon having one done with each yearly examination."

Thursday, April 21, 2005

The VATICAN asks — Got a prayer or a problem for the new pope? Now you can e-mail him! Showing that Pope Benedict XVI intends to follow in the footsteps of John Paul II's multimedia ministry, the Vatican released an e-mail address for Pope Benedict XVI: benedictxvi@vatican.va.

Wednesday, April 20, 2005

Anyone pondering the whereabouts of the ACLU during the kerfuffles of conservative pope picking and mall discrimination of teenages, the infamous organization has been spotted at the border where they are watching the Minutemen as they try to stop "illegals". Apparently, according to the ACLU, "illegally" crossing the U.S. border is just another civil liberty. Certainly then, a bit of pot-smoking would be too. How better to pass the time for bored Liberals, then smoking on the border. Check out South East Arizona Republican Club for more of the story and large pictures.

ACLU smoking dope at border?: "Minutemen say photos show 'legal observers' getting high ACLU 'legal observers' allegedly smoking marijuana while observing Minuteman volunteers. Volunteers with the Minuteman Project in Arizona say 'legal observers' sent by the ACLU to monitor the citizen border patrol have been seen smoking marijuana in violation of the law." Eleanor Eisenberg, executive director of the ACLU of Arizona, did not respond to a request for comment given to her assistant by WorldNetDaily. As WND reported, ACLU activists shadowing the Minuteman Project at the U.S.-Mexican border are actively aiding and abetting aliens attempting to enter the country illegally, according to a spokesman for the volunteer civilian force.

Grey Deacon told Joseph Farah's nationally syndicated "WorldNetDaily RadioActive" audience Friday that ACLU monitors sent to the border to watch Minuteman activity and report civil-liberties abuses to authorities have begun flashing lights, sounding horns and warning off illegals and their "coyote" human smugglers from entering territory patrolled by the volunteers. "They are actively engaging in criminal activity," said Deacon.

Do not miss Father Roderick's podcast from the Vatican as he watches for the puffs of white smoke. Father is one hip cat! Feel the tension - is it white, is it black, no it's gray? Now it's white! What color is this? The bells are not ringing. But it is white! Father says "I don't know what these cardinals are smoking over there." Again smoke! No bells. "Bianca, bianca! ... Total excitement, confusion and emotion." They see smoke for the third time and it is black, but no bells.

This podcast takes you back to the morning of Tuesday, April 19. We'll go to St. Peter's Square to witness the smoke that will indicate the result of the second and third ballots. Will it be white, or will it be black? The tension and excitement of the crowd is slowly building up! ~~Fr. Roderick, Black or White? ~ MP3

Of course, some people can't resist drawing parallels with American politics. Chris Matthews says he's Dick Cheney. Over on The Corner, speculation ranges from W. to Calvin Coolidge. If JPII was the Church's Reagan, then Ratzinger is pretty clearly Bush 41, the less flashy, long-serving "vice president" elected to carry on the father's work. The upshot of a shorter Papacy is that the next Pope is not likely as to be a protege of the current Pope, though Benedict XVI might appoint some solidly conservative Latin American and African Cardinals who would make for attractive, well-rounded successors.

The American Mind has found another moniker for Pope Benedict - "The Grand Inquisitor", coming from the mocking mind of Andrew Sullivan. Sean Hackbarth writes that if Andrew is not happy, it probably means Benedict's election is a good thing.

Confessions of a Political Junkie has an irreverant moniker, which he willl use if the new Pope starts excommunicating Kennedys. Does that include Maria Shriver and the Governator?

On a serious note, I am at a profound loss of explanation as to why I am so moved with emotion over the election of the Pope. I’m not Catholic. Heck, I’m Presbyterian. But, I was deeply excited by the prospect of Ratzinger being elected Pope and look what happened. What I think it is, is the same reason I wanted Bush to win re-election so badly: It sends a message to lefties that their “progressive” movement is not all that they think it is. Ratzinger’s election signals that the Catholic Church, unlike the Episopalians, the Lutherans, the PCUSA, the United Church of Christ, etc. will keep faithful to the idea that we change for God, God does not change for us. It is not so much that Ratzinger is an “ultraconservative.” It is that he is faithful to the Word of God.

I'm not a social conservative or a Catholic, so here's all I have to say about Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger becoming the next Pope: #1) If someone as openly hostile to religious people as Andrew Sullivan is furious about Ratzinger becoming Pope, then that's obviously a sign that he's a great choice. The only way it could get any better for Ratzinger would be if the ACLU issued a press release denouncing him.

Here is our America today. A mall in New Hampshire is prohibiting teenages from shopping there on Friday and Saturday nights, unless, --now get this --, they are accompanied by a parent. What teen wants to cruise the neighborhood mall with his/her mommy along? ACLU where are you? It gets even worse for the teens as Nashua's Pheasant Lane mall is prohibiting "gang-related" attire. That would be the long chains that fall below the knee and studded dog or wrist collars. The management of the mall claims that type of garb can be used as weaponry. Give me a break! What next - shotguns, nail clippers, knives, perfume, mace, bomb-laden backpacks? One of the teens, Leann Newcomb, questioned the rule. "They sell that stuff, how are they going to tell the kids after they buy that stuff not to wear it? Isn't that a violation of your constitutional rights?" That smart kid Leann knows about the Constitution and its guarantee to wear any weaponry or bizzare attire one chooses on other people's property. That is why God gave us the ACLU - to find those rights that no one else can find. My Way News

Tuesday, April 19, 2005

The white smoke has risen and Christendom has been given a new Pope. Of course, I suspect he is not really all that "new", as someone has been running the Papal show for these past years of John Paul II's illnesses, and everyone knows it was Cardinal Ratzinger. As Pope John Paul II neared death, Ratzinger was his most trusted aid and his words were believed to be those of the ailing Pope. The London tabloids are headlining the new Pope Benedict with "From Hitler Youth to PAPA RATZI" and "God's Rottweiler". The Washington Post and the NY Times are more respectful, although they cannot hide their dismay, as conservatism seems to have taken hold even in the church of that most famous of all liberals - Jesus!

After seeing this article at Yahoo News today, I believe that the new Pope and I will get on just fine, although I must admit it brings back memories of the first Catholic President - Kennedy - and his having to promise during the campaign, that he would not take orders from Rome's Pope, if he were elected. It worked and he was! Today, the Pope is attempting to give orders to America's politicians, and nobody notices.

German Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, the Vatican theologian who was elected Pope Benedict XVI, intervened in the 2004 US election campaign ordering bishops to deny communion to abortion rights supporters including presidential candidate John Kerry. In a June 2004 letter to US bishops enunciating principles of worthiness for communion recipients, Ratzinger specified that strong and open supporters of abortion should be denied the Catholic sacrament, for being guilty of a "grave sin."

We already know where Pope Benedict XVI stands, as it was he who coined the phrase "Culture of Death" when speaking against abortion. And he has just reminded us of his stand as Pope when he said; "We are moving towards a dictatorship of relativism, which does not recognize anything definitive and has as its highest value one's own ego and one's own desires."

Brendan Miniter has little good to say of the American Catholic Church. Writing today in OpinionJournal.com he bemoans "a hollowness that is preventing the American Catholic Church from reaching the heights we can rightfully expect of it."

The problem is symbolized by the recent bout of sex-abuse scandals--priests who molested children and who were then protected, their crimes covered up, by church leaders. Cardinal Bernard Law had to leave Boston and move to Rome after it became clear he'd written letters of recommendation for priests he knew were child molesters. The church's critics now hope to use these scandals to hobble it for years to come. The truth is that the sex scandals are a symptom of a larger problem: Many American clergymen no longer believe in the teachings of the church.

This crumbling of the moral consensus is more widespread than disagreements over birth control, abortion and the death penalty. It also includes the ordination of women, recognition of gay relationships and how best to confront poverty, disease and slothfulness. There were once Catholic missions in the United States--some are now tourist attractions in California and Texas--that dished out the harsh tonic to social ills of hard work, chastity and humbleness. But the courage of the church's convictions that built those institutions has long since left this land. As a whole, the American Catholic Church no longer knows what it stands for or why it should stand at all. This was true even as Pope John Paul II attained rock-star status among young people, attracting massive crowds wherever he traveled in the world, precisely because he knew exactly where he should stand.

Archbishop Fulton J. Sheen pointed out in 1931, that the world is suffering from too much tolerance - “tolerance of right and wrong, truth and error, virtue and evil, Christ and chaos”. In academia today is practiced the new trend of historical revisionism, or “advocacy scholarship,” that serves a social and political agenda. What does all this mean? Basically, history is not only being revised, but it is being re-read to be accepted and praised by the liberated minds of academia. That is what John Boswell did when he wrote this very popular book, Same-Sex Unions in Premodern Europe. As a past chairman of Yale University’s history department, he rewrote the early history of the Christian church to accomodate his gay agenda. In this “history according to Boswell,” homosexuality was tolerated in the first centuries of Christianity and homosexual marriages were church sanctioned in the Middle Ages.

Friday, April 15, 2005

You better believe it! What kind of insanity is this? Why would the descendants of fiery patriots put up with such tyranny? When is the Revolution coming? God Help Us ALL!

The basic tax return - the Form 1040 filed by most people every year - accounts for 1.6 billion hours. ... "If anything, those numbers are probably understated," said David Keating, president of the National Taxpayers Union, which reports annually on the increasing complexity and demands of tax returns. ... "A lot more of the cost is just planning to do the tax-smart thing. That can actually take a lot more time than reporting what you've done," he said.

Yes, and that is even before we mention the outrageous demands of the IRS to learn every miniscule detail of its citizens financial lives. A person who would be insulted to be asked how much he earns, sheepishly sends all the details of every penny in his possession to the government. Even the socialist Europeans do not tolerate the amount of intrusion into their personal lives, as do Americans! What sheep we are!

An unlimited power to tax involves, necessarily, a power to destroy; because there is a limit beyond which no institution and no property can bear taxation. ~~John Marshall, McCullough vs. Maryland, 1819

A wise and frugal government, which shall restrain men from injuring one another; shall leave them otherwise free to regulate their own pursuits of industry and improvement ~~ Thomas Jefferson -

The government taxes you when you bring home a paycheck. It taxes you when you make a phone call. It taxes you when you turn on a light. It taxes you when you sell a stock. It taxes you when you fill your car with gas. It taxes you when you ride a plane. It taxes you when you get married. Then it taxes you when you die. This is taxual insanity and it must end. ~~ J. C. Watts, Jr.

I just wanted to speak to you about something from the Internal Revenue Code. It is the last sentence of section 509A of the code and it reads: 'For purposes of paragraph 3, an organization described in paragraph 2 shall be deemed to include an organization described in section 501C-4, 5, or 6, which would be described in paragraph 2 if it were an organization described in section 501C-3.' And that's just one sentence out of those fifty-seven feet of books. ~~ Ronald Reagan

The Senate Foreign Relations Committee hearings on the nomination of John Bolton to be U.S. ambassador to the U.N. publicly unmasked the campaign which has been underway to discredit him and derail his nomination. They also demonstrated once again the need to reform the Senate confirmation process, which has become so politicized that it is not serving its constitutional purpose.

John Bolton has served our nation well in many posts under three presidents. He deserves to be confirmed. But regardless of the outcome of the hearings, he has provided another valuable service: he has revealed Senate hearings to be the weapon of choice of vicious and anonymous staffers and their narcissistic bosses to engage in character assassination and ideological vendettas. But more important to our national security in this time of war, he has uncovered a dangerous willingness by some senior intelligence officers to protect underlings who have been promoted to their highest level of incompetence. The intelligence community is our first line of defense against today's enemies.

Thursday, April 14, 2005

What a wise man old Ben Franklin was, and how unwise are we to have not followed his admonitions. Instead, we are relying upon elite universities like NYU, and rable-rousing professors like Ward Churchill to raise up the next generation of Americans.

"A Bible and a newspaper in every house, a good school in every district- all studied and appreciated as they merit - are the principle support ofvirtue, morality, and civil liberty." wrote ~~Benjamin Franklin, March 1778

Wednesday, April 13, 2005

American believes in the culture of life, not the culture of death. There is an interesting post at Jackson's Journal today. Daniel Borchers of www.BrotherWatch.com reminds us that our founding documents do not bestow a "right to die", but instead make clear that the new nation should come down on the "right to life", by the use of phrases such as "inalienable rights"  and "endowed by their Creator". The Declaration of Independence proclaims unabashedly; "Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness". No where in our founding documents is found the phrase, "right to die".

I posted at Kerfuffles in March: We have no right to die. Our lives belong to our Creator and it is by His will that we live and die. Our laws do not give us a right to die. Our laws do not permit suicide. When a person attempts to leap from a bridge, we do all we can to intervene. We do not say "jump, that is your right". We have no right to die, and neither do we have a right to kill other humans by starvation.

"The Founding Fathers recognized the evil nature of the human heart and devised a complex system of checks and balances designed to dilute the power of those in government. The three branches of government are meant to check one another. Congress was doing its job in congressional oversight. Indeed, perhaps that piece of congressional legislation was the most important task it undertook this year as it dealt with protecting an innocent human life, with ensuring equal protection under the law, with raising the culture of life paradigm to national consciousness, and with taking a stand predicated upon the very principles upon which our Republic was founded."

I believe that agrees with what I said at the time of the new legislation from Congress at The Media Are Clueless.

Monday, April 11, 2005

Robert Novak writes today in the Chicago Sun that former Congressman Bob Livingston was asked by New York Times editorial page staffer Tobin Harshaw to write an op-ed essay Majority Leader Tom DeLay should resign for the good of the party. Harshaw was quoted as saying ''we are seeking those who would go on the record or state for the good of the party he (DeLay) should step aside".

"Livingston in effect declined by responding that if he wrote anything for the Times, it would be pro-DeLay. But this remarkable case of that august newspaper fishing for an op-ed piece makes it appear part of a calculated campaign to bring down the single most powerful Republican in Congress. The Democratic establishment and left-wing activists have targeted DeLay as the way to end a decade of Republican control of the House."

'The assault on DeLay did not begin until he redistricted Texas congressional seats, which changed the 2004 election from a net loss to a net gain for House Republicans. That accomplishment, however, makes it much harder to rip holes in DeLay's House GOP support.

'At least 18 news organizations now have assigned reporters to cover DeLay, but the quest by The New York Times for a prominent Republican to suggest his resignation may cross a line."

WILLisms Blog says "The event would have been entirely ho-hum but for the ominous statue of Robert Byrd hovering above Lewis:". Look at the picture! He's right. There is the Bronzed Senator Robert C. Byrd hovering over the new GOP challenger, while Mr. Lewis is delivering his entrance speech. Byrd is actually in the pose and costume of a revivalist preacher, pointing to the Hell all will go who do not live by his words. What looks like a Bible is probably his "ever ready" copy of the Constitution. See the video below where he waves it on high while speaking to the MoveOners at MoverOn.Org.

Zsa Zsa's comment at WILLisms Blog says "What a Byrd brain? I hope all the birds will pay tribute to it." I think that is a better idea than toppling the statue. Smear some peanut butter on it's hoary head, release a flock of pigeons at the State Capitol Building in Old West Virginny, and the birds will pay tribute. - Not Really!

I kind of agree with someone in the Blogoshere who said that the Republicans should quit slamming Senator Byrd for his KKK connections as that is ancient news. Why bother with "old news" when there is such a bounteous collection of "new news". There is almost a guarantee to be even more "newer news" in future. The Honorable Senator Robert C. Byrd is the gift that keeps on giving. Bye Bye Byrdie!

Sunday, April 10, 2005

The Wide Awakes has a very good post on Social Security Reform and the despicable tactics of the AARP.

"AARP stands for Against Any Reform. Period. Or: How I Learned to Assume the Worst for Social Security and Despise the AARP

"Why? In an acronym: AARP. These letters comprise a political force that not only conservatives but also average Joe and Josephine Worker should fear and loathe. On Social Security Reform, AARP stands for Against Any Reform. Period.

"Message to the AARP: leave my money alone! In the words of the Angry Fireman from Ren and Stimpy: 'I’ve had it up to HERE with the likes of you people!'”

Social Security Choice has lots of detailed information and a post that says that the AARP is rowing in the opposite direction, forcing the reform boat to spin in the same place. AARP

Mark Noonan over at Blogs for Bush is hoping that State Republican Party Treasurer Hiram Lewis IV, new GOP challenger to the Byrd of Ole West Virginny, will be able to vanquish the King Of Pork. Alas, he was sorely distressed to discover a larger than life marble statue of the solan in the state's capitol. Mark writes:

Mark Noonan was outraged enough about the statue, but imagine his ire when he learned the rest of the story - that almost every thing in the entire state of Ole West Virginny is named The Robert C. Byrd "something or other". Obviously, Mark has not visited the mountain state. He ponders how the statue was erected in the first place, as it violates state law prohibiting statues of government officials until they have been dead for half a century. Guess what Mark, that's about right! Anyway, since Mark still believes this is an "un-American outrage" he is saying that "we shouldn't be waiting for an election to get rid of Byrd, we should be impeaching him"! Oh dear, another impeachment. Mark is demanding "That statue should be ripped down today; as our ancestors once upon a time ripped down the icons of living political leaders who taxed and oppressed our people."

Any of you Mountaineers out there who would like to give Mark Noonan a hand or two as he topples another icon of tyranny, in the tradition of our ancestors, I guess you can find him over at Blogs for Bush.

"What a weird feeling that must be! To know that a permanent likeness of yourself is already gracing the Capitol of your home state would give me the willies. But then, I must not have the ego and chutzpah to force the issue through the state legislature in the first place."

"Although there were a few tense moments when authorities closed the line snaking slowly into the basilica earlier this week, and some booing and whistling yesterday when the security screening slowed pilgrims' admission to St. Peter's, no major incidents were reported."

The AP (Associated Press) is reporting in Newsday.com; "As the security measures slowed the line of faithful trying to reach the square, some pilgrims booed and whistled in protest."

There now seem to be more reports of booing at President Bush which are not AP. The one from Scotsman.com's Press Association sounds exactly like the AP report, "But when Mr Bush’s face appeared on giant screens showing the ceremony – many in the crowds outside St Peter’s Square booed and whistled". Der Spiegel is the other, and I can only link the original Der Spiegel German article, as Der Spiegel offers no translation. The wording in the German report is different, although it could be a result of translation. "Believers boo at Bush: Shrill hoots could be heard when a closeup of Bush was shown on a large screen. The crowd in front of St. Peter's Square reacted to the large close-up with Bush's face with boos and hoots."

The New York Daily News has this report from Charles W. Bell: "Geopolitical grudges were largely suspended for the day, but the international good will was interrupted briefly when Bush's face appeared on one of the 27 giant screens broadcasting the funeral and there was a scattering of boos and whistles."

Now I return to my original posting on this subject: Europe's Faux Christians. If they booed and disrespected our president at the Pope's funeral, well the shame is on them, not us.

Although the "booing" of President Bush seems to have been witnessed only by Victor L. Simpson of the Associated Press, Hi Pakistan is reporting today that when police turned away pilgrims at the Vatican, there was indeed "booing", but targeted at the police! Perhaps Mr. Bush was appearing on the video screens at the same time. (;

Occasionally they called in unison for the police to "open, open," and chanted, "We are not terrorists." At one point, hundreds of people led by young women breached a double line of barricades. Police raised their hands to stop them but stepped aside rather than risk a confrontation. The group was stopped at a third barricade manned by Carabinieri military police. Police made a few exceptions to the Civil Defence order.

A Mexican family with two weeping teenagers and a small child was allowed to cross through the barricade and over the bridge to join the end of the line. Rather than protest, the crowd applauded.

Elsewhere, police allowed an ambulance through. The crowd cleared a path for it to pass, and some tried to follow the vehicle through the open gate but were easily stopped. Onlookers groaned and booed.

"We’re a little angry because we can’t get in. We would like to at least get into St. Peter’s to pray. It doesn’t matter if we don’t manage to see the pope," said Rossana Zampelli, 25, who came from a town in southern Italy.Hi Pakistan

Wizbang is asking:

Bush Booed At Pope's Funeral? ... following are early reports of the Pope's funeral from AP writer Victor L. Simpson ..... It's not important that you read them, just that you note what they're missing. Later versions Simpson's report, which include the one now running on the AP wire, got at least one interesting new paragraph.

"When Bush's face appeared on giant screen TVs showing the ceremony, many in the crowds outside St. Peter's Square booed and whistled."

A question for TiVo viewers, did you see this or did the network anchors mention this? While I don't doubt that its possible President Bush was booed by the crowds, it seems odd that of the 3,500 journalists covering the event only Victor L. Simpson (or one of his two contributors - Nicole Winfield and Daniela Petroff) notice this booing. Actually make that two people who noticed, since the Scotsman.com uses very similar wording. The two accounts probably have the same lineage, either Simpson's came from The Press Association accounts or their account came from Simpson.

In fact if you filter out "Associated Press", "AP", "Simpson", and "When Bush's face appeared" it nearly disappears from the Google News search results for: bush booed. I'm just curious if anyone else noted this crowd reaction to the President.

Absolutely the Funniest Item of the Day“The strange death of Protestant England” read a headline in the Guardian the next day. “Catholicism hasn’t been this chic since Bloody Mary burned Rowan Williams’s first Protestant predecessor at the stake.”

or was it just more phantom booing from the Associated Press? I vote with the latter and say that Bush received Phantom Booes! I have searched for any news reporting it and there only exists that one sentence from the AP. As I quote Mary below, I guess you had to be there, to know for sure. Chrenkov in his "Farewell to John Paul" was dubious, because the booing had been reported by AP. I should have taken my clue from him:

"In Vatican itself, AP writes that "when Bush's face appeared on giant screen TVs showing the ceremony, many in the crowds outside St. Peter's Square booed and whistled." I didn't catch that live last night, and while I'm skeptical of AP stories involving booing, if it did happen I apologize for the idiots involved. There are disagreements, and there are times and places to express them, but funerals aren't it. Syria's Assad, Iran's Khatami and Zimbabwe's Mugabe were also present and whatever I may think of them it would never cross my mind to be rude towards them at such an occasion."

Bush Gets Boo’s At Pope’s Funeral?A Google News search for the above sentence returned exactly two media outlets still running that version of Simpson’s AP story, The Spokesman-Review (PDF Copy) and CBS News (PDF Copy). Wizbang also notes a few other sources for the story at the link above, but the point is that out of all the massive amounts of media coverage surrounding the Pope’s funeral the only report mentioning Bush getting boo’s is this one AP story by Mr. Simpson.

Now, given the AP’s history of reporting on phantom boo’s aimed at President Bush (its happenedbefore), we have to wonder: While it wouldn’t be surprising if the President had gotten boo’s, but were there really boo’s or is this just another instance of a reporter looking to take a cheap shot at the President?

"Another AP story involving the President and booing------- Is it possible people booed when Bush's face was shown? Sure, although it certainly would have been a very inappropriate time for political protest and exceedingly boorish to do when the world was uniting to remember the greatness of John Paul II. Personally, I don't have a lot of faith in AP reporting when it comes to booing. I guess you had to be there."

I guess so, Mary, since we can have no faith in any reporting from the Associated Press, considering "The Crowd That Didn't Boo".

(Editor's Note) When I wrote this post I based it upon an Associated Press report of what I now believe was false and inaccurate reporting. Yes, just another case of AP's "Phantom Booing".

in Rome, to the delight of the Leftists back at home. How interesting that in the Blogosphere, the Liberals are always happy to see the United States disrespected and taken down a notch. Too bad for them, that most us here at home, don't give a flying leap for the opinions of such a gaggle of Socialists. That they love Bill Clinton tells alot about who they are, and we already know who he is. I have already blogged, Europe's Faux Christians, about the Euro's shocking manners at John Paul II's funeral Mass. However, the left loved it and here is an example:

"Clearly unwilling to spend a beautiful day in Rome cooped up in his hotel, he went for a midday stroll...Mr. Clinton was clearly reveling in the fact that shoppers, tourists having lunch at outdoor cafes and Italian business people walking to meetings all stopped to greet him...Along the streets, people starting yelling "Bill, Bill, Bill," and a few shouted "U.S.A.!" One shopkeeper raced out with a photograph of Mr. Clinton on a past visit...by the time Mr. Clinton made it out of the back streets and into the open square, a mob of hundreds developed."

Perhaps, this will bring a tear to your eye. In contrast to the waves of Booooing that hit Bush today at the Pope's funeral, Bill Clinton was Mobbed and greeted with adoring chants of U.S.A.!, U.S.A.!, U.S.A.!

As Mr. Clinton went for a walk, ...shoppers, tourists having lunch at outdoor cafes and Italian business people going to meetings all stopped to greet him.

Along the streets, people starting yelling "Bill, Bill, Bill," and a few shouted "U.S.A.!" One shopkeeper raced out with a photograph of Mr. Clinton on a past visit.

"You go around the world and you see a lot of affection for Americans," he said.

[can you imagine, a plain shopkeeper has Clinton’s photo hanging on his wall]

..by the time Mr. Clinton made it out of the back streets and into the open square, a mob of hundreds developed. Mr. Clinton's nervous Italian bodyguards put him in a car and sped him away.

After the dinner with the Italian leader, he went out with President Viktor Yuschenko and stayed out with him until after midnight.

Friday, April 08, 2005

Grandmama is old ... has glaucoma and now this heart problem, and who would want to live with disabilities like these?

Glenn Beck's Interview with Kenneth Mullinax (AUDIO), nephew and cousin of the family, who believes the answer to the granddaughter's query is that it is grandma who indeed wants "to live with disabilities like these".

You have been told that if you have a living will which declares that you do not want to be euthanized unless you are in a persistent vegetative state, that you will be saved from court ordered starvation? Think again. An 81-year-old widow, neither terminally ill, comatose nor in a 'vegetative state' is being denied nourishment and fluids at another of those infamous hospices, this one in Georgia. Mae Magouirk had written a living will which was totally ignored by the medical team and her 36 year old granddaughter, Beth Gaddy. Two weeks ago, Mrs. Magouirk was a woman living alone, while relying upon her granddaughter to do errands. She was hospitalized for a severe, aortic problem and placed in intensive care. At the time of her admission she was lucid and had never been diagnosed with dementia. After her medical problem was corrected, her granddaughter had her transfered to the hospice, claiming that she held power of attorney for her grandmother, and once at the hospice, Ms. Gaddy demanded that the elderly woman be denied food, water or intravenous feeding. She told her grandmother's siblings who were legally the next of kin, "Grandmama is old and I think it is time she went home to Jesus. She has glaucoma and now this heart problem, and who would want to live with disabilities like these?" When the next of kin spoke up and had the feeding and hydration restored to their relative, the granddaughter went to court and had herself legally appointed guardian.

Ron Panzer, president and founder of Hospice Patients Alliance, said what is happening to Magouirk is not at all unusual. "This is happening in hospices all over the country," he said. "Patients who are not dying – are not terminal – are admitted [to hospice] and the hospice will say they are terminally ill even if they're not. There are thousands of cases like this. Patients are given morphine and ativan to sedate them. If feeding is withheld, they die within 10 days to two weeks. It's really just a form of euthanasia."

If you are an heir, you may have to decide between euthanasia and years of nursing home care which can sustantially diminish an elderly relative's monetary estate. That may be money that you were hoping to inherit. Does it matter that perhaps Granny saved that money for her old age, so that she could be properly cared for without being a financial burden to you?

(Editor's Note) When I wrote this post I based it upon an Associated Press report of what I now believe was false and inaccurate reporting. Yes, just another case of AP's "Phantom Booing".

President Bush Booed in Rome

One can always count on the Euroweenies to proclaim their hatred of America. Even when "supposedly" in solemn mourning for their "supposedly" beloved Pope, and at his very funeral, they found in their "supposedly" Christian hearts to demonstrate their hatred of Americans by loudly booing President George Bush's image on the big TV screens. Is this is the legacy that the Vicar of Christ, Pope John Paul II, after 26 years of service, has left in Europe? What a pity. Here in the United States of America, we have granted the great pope the respect that was his due, notwithstanding that we are largely Protestants. For the first time in our history we sent a United States President to attend a papal funeral mass, accompanied by his wife and his father who is a former President. After all the years of Pope John Paul II's Christian teachings, the assembled Catholics disrespected him, his funeral, and all the citizens of the United States. If this is the future of Christian/Catholic Europe, there is no hope for them and their countries!

President George W. Bush and his family, at their own request,remained out of public view, in order to keep the focus on the pope. Their two days in Rome were spent away from the usual limelight. As they were mourning the pontiff, their images were captured by cameras beyond their control, and they were booed. How rude of Europe's Catholics! President Bush had nothing but praise and adulation for your pope. He said that attending the funeral mass reminded him about "Faith — it's a walk, not a moment, not a respite". How rude and disgraceful indeed, knowing that your "supposedly" beloved pope was observing all of you from on high. In reality, your behavior shows your true inner selves; that you are not believers, that your faith is shallow. You showed yourselves to be faux Christians in fake mourning garb.

April 8, 2005, 11:34AMAP ABOARD AIR FORCE ONE — President Bush today said that attending the funeral of Pope John Paul II was "one of the highlights of my presidency" and made clear that he disagrees with former President Clinton's assessment that the pontiff leaves a mixed legacy. Bush talked about his time in Rome in extraordinarily personal terms, saying it strengthened his own belief in a "living God." He remarked on how affected he was by the services, particularly the music and the sight of the plain casket being carried out with the sun pouring down on it. As he viewed the pope's body, Bush said, he felt "very much at peace" and "much more in touch with his spirit." "I knew the ceremony today would be majestic but I didn't realize how moved I would be by the service itself," the president said. "Today's ceremony, I bet you, was a reaffirmation for millions." That was true for him, Bush said.

As for former President Bill Clinton, whose image did not get booed, here is what was posted by The Anchoress:

President Bush seemed to go out of his way to minimize himself at this event - to make sure that nothing overshadowed the pope's final tribute. He made himself unavailable for photos and photo-ops. As did his father. Former President Clinton however made himself as available as possible - allowing himself to be taped walking thoughtfully through a garden, being interviewed by Brian Williams. That's our Bill. The bride at every wedding, the corpse at every funeral.

"Where were all these people when the pope was alive?" asks Daniel Henninger of OpinionJournal - Wonder Land. "If in the 26 years of his pontificate, John Paul had received half the emotional or intellectual support for his message that issued from TV's screens the past seven days, the crude troops of new culture in the West might well have faced a counter-force. John Paul's politics may have won in the East, but they lost in the West."

Regarding those faux Christian Catholics and their fake mourning for the pope, read what Catholic blogger Carrie Tomko wrote today:

What will be the legacy of the man who loved? Now that he has gone and the love fest has ended, will the world finally get around to listening to what he told us, that Jesus Christ is Lord, and that He gave us Commandments and a Church to mold us into the people He wanted us to be? Or will the emotion cool and the world move on its merry way still trying to mold Christ into whatever image the mood of the moment dictates?

Preach. Teach. Confess. wrote: Spectacle in Rome ... Isn't it wonderful when an American president gets booed during a funeral? Should we incorporate this into our own funeral services?